framesail

Get status

get_status

Read-onlyIdempotent

Where things stand and what to do next; start and resume here.

Always reports the account: plan, credits, credits held by running jobs, and credits_available to spend. project_id adds the project's settings, each step's state and web link, jobs with readable errors, export_url, next_step and, when something failed, failures: the last failed jobs and the failed segments grouped by kind and error. channel_id reports the channel style instead: analysis_done, inputs_stale, templates, templates_stale and next_step. Without API access it reports only the account and subscription_needed: pass that on to the user.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_status"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`wait`	No	Wait up to about 50 seconds for the jobs in scope to finish, then report only credits, jobs, step states and next_step; call again if some still run
`channel_id`	No	Report this channel's style instead of a project
`project_id`	No	Project id

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 1, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already cover the read-only, idempotent, non-destructive profile, and the description goes further by disclosing conditional output (project_id vs channel_id), polling behavior via wait, and a degraded mode where 'Without API access it reports only the account and subscription_needed'. It does not cover rate limits or response size, keeping it off a 5.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The lead sentence is front-loaded and every clause carries information, but the middle section is a dense run-on listing many returned fields, which slows scanning. Still, there is no filler or restatement of the name.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema, the description carries the full burden of explaining return values, and it does so thoroughly per parameter scope plus failure reporting ('failures: the last failed jobs and the failed segments grouped by kind and error'). An agent has everything needed to call this correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description meaningfully extends the schema by explaining what each selector produces: project_id yields settings, step states, jobs with readable errors and export_url; channel_id reports a different set of style fields. That output-conditional semantics is not expressed in the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific purpose ('Where things stand and what to do next') and enumerates what is reported in each scope (account, project, channel), which distinguishes it clearly from edit/generate/read siblings. It is not a tautology of the title, though the opening framing is slightly abstract before the concrete reporting details arrive.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

'start and resume here' gives explicit entry-point and re-entry guidance that no sibling offers, and the wait parameter's 'call again if some still run' clarifies polling usage. It does not name alternative tools or exclusion conditions, so it falls short of a 5.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All framesail tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?